Articles | Volume 16, issue 9
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-2415-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-2415-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Applicability of the low-cost OPC-N3 optical particle counter for microphysical measurements of fog
Institute of Geophysics, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
Moein Mohammadi
Institute of Geophysics, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
Szymon Malinowski
Institute of Geophysics, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
Krzysztof Markowicz
Institute of Geophysics, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
Related authors
No articles found.
Hans Segura, Xabier Pedruzo-Bagazgoitia, Philipp Weiss, Sebastian K. Müller, Thomas Rackow, Junhong Lee, Edgar Dolores-Tesillos, Imme Benedict, Matthias Aengenheyster, Razvan Aguridan, Gabriele Arduini, Alexander J. Baker, Jiawei Bao, Swantje Bastin, Eulàlia Baulenas, Tobias Becker, Sebastian Beyer, Hendryk Bockelmann, Nils Brüggemann, Lukas Brunner, Suvarchal K. Cheedela, Sushant Das, Jasper Denissen, Ian Dragaud, Piotr Dziekan, Madeleine Ekblom, Jan Frederik Engels, Monika Esch, Richard Forbes, Claudia Frauen, Lilli Freischem, Diego García-Maroto, Philipp Geier, Paul Gierz, Álvaro González-Cervera, Katherine Grayson, Matthew Griffith, Oliver Gutjahr, Helmuth Haak, Ioan Hadade, Kerstin Haslehner, Shabeh ul Hasson, Jan Hegewald, Lukas Kluft, Aleksei Koldunov, Nikolay Koldunov, Tobias Kölling, Shunya Koseki, Sergey Kosukhin, Josh Kousal, Peter Kuma, Arjun U. Kumar, Rumeng Li, Nicolas Maury, Maximilian Meindl, Sebastian Milinski, Kristian Mogensen, Bimochan Niraula, Jakub Nowak, Divya Sri Praturi, Ulrike Proske, Dian Putrasahan, René Redler, David Santuy, Domokos Sármány, Reiner Schnur, Patrick Scholz, Dmitry Sidorenko, Dorian Spät, Birgit Sützl, Daisuke Takasuka, Adrian Tompkins, Alejandro Uribe, Mirco Valentini, Menno Veerman, Aiko Voigt, Sarah Warnau, Fabian Wachsmann, Marta Wacławczyk, Nils Wedi, Karl-Hermann Wieners, Jonathan Wille, Marius Winkler, Yuting Wu, Florian Ziemen, Janos Zimmermann, Frida A.-M. Bender, Dragana Bojovic, Sandrine Bony, Simona Bordoni, Patrice Brehmer, Marcus Dengler, Emanuel Dutra, Saliou Faye, Erich Fischer, Chiel van Heerwaarden, Cathy Hohenegger, Heikki Järvinen, Markus Jochum, Thomas Jung, Johann H. Jungclaus, Noel S. Keenlyside, Daniel Klocke, Heike Konow, Martina Klose, Szymon Malinowski, Olivia Martius, Thorsten Mauritsen, Juan Pedro Mellado, Theresa Mieslinger, Elsa Mohino, Hanna Pawłowska, Karsten Peters-von Gehlen, Abdoulaye Sarré, Pajam Sobhani, Philip Stier, Lauri Tuppi, Pier Luigi Vidale, Irina Sandu, and Bjorn Stevens
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 7735–7761, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-7735-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-7735-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The Next Generation of Earth Modeling Systems project (nextGEMS) developed two Earth system models that use horizontal grid spacing of 10 km and finer, giving more fidelity to the representation of local phenomena, globally. In its fourth cycle, nextGEMS simulated the Earth System climate over the 2020–2049 period under the SSP3-7.0 scenario. Here, we provide an overview of nextGEMS, insights into the model development, and the realism of multi-decadal, kilometer-scale simulations.
Robert Grosz, Kamal Kant Chandrakar, Raymond A. Shaw, Jesse C. Anderson, Will Cantrell, and Szymon P. Malinowski
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 18, 2619–2638, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-2619-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-2619-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Our objective was to enhance understanding of thermally driven convection in terms of small-scale variations in the temperature scalar field. We conducted a small-scale study of the temperature field in the Π Chamber using three different temperature differences (10 K, 15 K, and 20 K). Measurements were carried out using a miniaturized UltraFast Thermometer operating at 2 kHz, allowing undisturbed vertical temperature profiling from 8 cm above the floor to 5 cm below the ceiling.
Jakub L. Nowak, Marie Lothon, Donald H. Lenschow, and Szymon P. Malinowski
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 18, 93–114, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-93-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-93-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
According to classical theory, the ratio of turbulence statistics corresponding to transverse and longitudinal wind velocity components equals 4/3 in the inertial range of scales. We analyse a large number of measurements obtained with three research aircraft during four field experiments in different locations and show that the observed ratios are almost always significantly smaller. We discuss potential reasons for this disagreement, but the actual explanation remains to be determined.
Jakub L. Nowak, Robert Grosz, Wiebke Frey, Dennis Niedermeier, Jędrzej Mijas, Szymon P. Malinowski, Linda Ort, Silvio Schmalfuß, Frank Stratmann, Jens Voigtländer, and Tadeusz Stacewicz
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 4075–4089, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-4075-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-4075-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
A high-resolution infrared hygrometer (FIRH) was adapted to measure humidity and its rapid fluctuations in turbulence inside a moist-air wind tunnel LACIS-T where two air streams of different temperature and humidity are mixed. The measurement was achieved from outside the tunnel through its glass windows and provided an agreement with a reference dew-point hygrometer placed inside. The characterization of humidity complements previous investigations of velocity and temperature fields.
Moein Mohammadi, Jakub L. Nowak, Guus Bertens, Jan Moláček, Wojciech Kumala, and Szymon P. Malinowski
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 965–985, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-965-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-965-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
To compare two instruments, a VisiSize D30 shadowgraph system and a phase Doppler interferometer (PDI-FPDR), we performed a series of measurements of cloud droplet size and number concentration in orographic clouds. After applying essential modifications and filters to the data, the results from the two instruments showed better agreement in droplet sizing and velocimetry than droplet number concentration or liquid water content. Discrepancies were observed for droplets smaller than 13 µm.
Cited articles
Badura, M., Batog, P., Drzeniecka-Osiadacz, A., and Modzel, P.: Evaluation of Low-Cost Sensors for Ambient PM2.5 Monitoring, J. Sensors, 2018, 5096540, https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5096540, 2018. a, b
Barmpadimos, I., Keller, J., Oderbolz, D., Hueglin, C., and Prévôt, A. S. H.: One decade of parallel fine (PM2.5) and coarse (PM10–PM2.5) particulate matter measurements in Europe: trends and variability, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 3189–3203, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-3189-2012, 2012. a
Bartok, J., Bott, A., and Gera, M.: Fog Prediction for Road Traffic Safety in a Coastal Desert Region, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 145, 485–506, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-012-9750-5, 2012. a
Beloconi, A. and Vounatsou, P.: Substantial Reduction in Particulate Matter Air Pollution across Europe during 2006–2019: A Spatiotemporal Modeling Analysis, Environ. Sci. Technol., 55, 15505–15518, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.1c03748, 2021. a
Burnet, F., Lac, C., Martinet, P., Fourrié, N., Haeffelin, M., Delanoë, J., Price, J., Barrau, S., Canut, G., Cayez, G., Dabas, A., Denjean, C., Dupont, J.-C., Honnert, R., Mahfouf, J.-F., Montmerle, T., Roberts, G., Seity, Y., and Vié, B.: The SOuth west FOGs 3D experiment for processes study (SOFOG3D) project, EGU General Assembly 2020, Online, 4–8 May 2020, EGU2020-17836, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu2020-17836, 2020. a
Colette, A. and Rouïl, L.: ETC/ATNI Report 16/2019: Air Quality Trends in Europe: 2000–2017. Assessment for surface SO2, NO2, Ozone, PM10 and PM2.5 – Eionet Portal, Eionet Report – ETC/ATNI 2019/16,
https://www.eionet.europa.eu/etcs/etc-atni/products/etc-atni-reports/etc-atni-report-16-2019-air-quality-trends-in-europe-2000-2017-assessment-for-surface-so2-no2-ozone-pm10-and-pm2-5-1 (last access: 1 August 2022), 2021. a
Considine, E. M., Reid, C. E., Ogletree, M. R., and Dye, T.: Improving accuracy of air pollution exposure measurements: Statistical correction of a municipal low-cost airborne particulate matter sensor network, Environ. Pollut., 268, 115833, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115833, 2021. a
Crilley, L. R., Shaw, M., Pound, R., Kramer, L. J., Price, R., Young, S., Lewis, A. C., and Pope, F. D.: Evaluation of a low-cost optical particle counter (Alphasense OPC-N2) for ambient air monitoring, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 709–720, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-709-2018, 2018. a
Degefie, D., El-Madany, T.-S., Hejkal, J., Held, M., Dupont, J.-C., Haeffelin, M., and Klemm, O.: Microphysics and energy and water fluxes of various fog types at SIRTA, France, Atmos. Res., 151, 162–175,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2014.03.016, 2015. a
Elias, T., Haeffelin, M., Drobinski, P., Gomes, L., Rangognio, J., Bergot, T., Chazette, P., Raut, J., and Colomb, M.: Extinction of Light during the Fog Life Cycle: a Result from the ParisFog Experiment, AIP Conf. Proc., 1100, 165–168, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3116939, 2009a. a
Elias, T., Haeffelin, M., Drobinski, P., Gomes, L., Rangognio, J., Bergot, T., Chazette, P., Raut, J.-C., and Colomb, M.: Particulate contribution to extinction of visible radiation: Pollution, haze, and fog, Atmos. Res., 92, 443–454, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2009.01.006, 2009b. a
Feinberg, S. N., Williams, R., Hagler, G., Low, J., Smith, L., Brown, R., Garver, D., Davis, M., Morton, M., Schaefer, J., and Campbell, J.: Examining spatiotemporal variability of urban particulate matter and application of high-time resolution data from a network of low-cost air pollution sensors, Atmos. Environ., 213, 579–584, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2019.06.026, 2019. a
Girdwood, J., Smith, H., Stanley, W., Ulanowski, Z., Stopford, C., Chemel, C., Doulgeris, K.-M., Brus, D., Campbell, D., and Mackenzie, R.: Design and field campaign validation of a multi-rotor unmanned aerial vehicle and optical particle counter, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 6613–6630, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-6613-2020, 2020. a
Gultepe, I.: Fog and Boundary Layer Clouds: Fog Visibility and Forecasting,
Birkhäuser, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7643-8419-7, 2007. a
Gultepe, I., Tardif, R., Michaelides, S., Cermak, J., Bott, A., Muller, M.,
Pagowski, M., Hansen, B., Ellrod, G., Jacobs, W., Toth, G., and Cober, S.:
Fog research: A review of past achievements and future perspectives, Pure
Appl. Geophys., 164, 1121–1159, 2007. a
Gultepe, I., Pearson, G., Milbrandt, J. A., Hansen, B., Platnick, S., Taylor, P., Gordon, M., Oakley, J. P., and Cober, S. G.: The Fog Remote Sensing and Modeling Field Project, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 90, 341–360, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008BAMS2354.1, 2009. a
Gultepe, I., Zhou, B., Milbrandt, J., Bott, A., Li, Y., Heymsfield, A.,
Ferrier, B., Ware, R., Pavolonis, M., Kuhn, T., Gurka, J., Liu, P., and
Cermak, J.: A review on ice fog measurements and modeling, Atmos. Res., 151, 2–19, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2014.04.014, 2015. a
Gultepe, I., Milbrandt, J. A., and Zhou, B.: Marine Fog: A Review on Microphysics and Visibility Prediction, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 345–394, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45229-6_7, 2017. a
Gultepe, I., Heymsfield, A., Fernando, H., Pardyjak, E., Dorman, C., Wang, Q., Creegan, E., Hoch, S., Flagg, D., Yamaguchi, R., Krishnamurthy, R., Gabersek, S., Perrie, W., Perelet, A., Singh, D., Chang, R., Nagare, B., Wagh, S., and Wang, S.: A Review of Coastal Fog Microphysics During C-FOG, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 181, 1–39, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-021-00659-5, 2021. a, b
Habeck, J. B., Hogan, C. J., Flaten, J. A., and Candler, G. V.: Development of a calibration system for measuring aerosol particles in the stratosphere, in: AIAA SCITECH 2022 Forum, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., p. 1582, https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2022-1582, 2022. a
Haeffelin, M., Bergot, T., Elias, T., Tardif, R., Carrer, D., Chazette, P., Colomb, M., Drobinski, P., Dupont, E., Dupont, J.-C., Gomes, L., Musson-Genon, L., Pietras, C., Plana-Fattori, A., Protat, A., Rangognio, J., Raut, J.-C., Rémy, S., Richard, D., Sciare, J., and Zhang, X.: Parisfog: Shedding new Light on Fog Physical Processes, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 91, 767–783, https://doi.org/10.1175/2009BAMS2671.1, 2010. a
Hagan, D. H. and Kroll, J. H.: Assessing the accuracy of low-cost optical particle sensors using a physics-based approach, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 6343–6355, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-6343-2020, 2020. a, b, c
Hale, G. M. and Querry, M. R.: Optical Constants of Water in the 200-nm to
200-µm Wavelength Region, Appl. Opt., 12, 555–563,
https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.12.000555, 1973. a
Hamazu, K., Hashiguchi, H., Wakayama, T., Matsuda, T., Doviak, R. J., and Fukao, S.: A 35-GHz Scanning Doppler Radar for Fog Observations, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 20, 972–986, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(2003)20<972:AGSDRF>2.0.CO;2, 2003. a
Hu, H., Sun, J., and Zhang, Q.: Assessing the Impact of Surface and Wind Profiler Data on Fog Forecasting Using WRF 3DVAR: An OSSE Study on a Dense Fog Event over North China, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 56, 1059–1081, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-16-0246.1, 2017. a
Jayaratne, R., Liu, X., Thai, P., Dunbabin, M., and Morawska, L.: The influence of humidity on the performance of a low-cost air particle mass sensor and the effect of atmospheric fog, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 4883–4890, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-4883-2018, 2018. a
Kashdan, J. T., Shrimpton, J. S., and Whybrew, A.: Two-Phase Flow Characterization by Automated Digital Image Analysis. Part 1: Fundamental Principles and Calibration of the Technique, Part. Part. Syst. Char., 20, 387–397, https://doi.org/10.1002/ppsc.200300897, 2003. a, b, c, d
Kashdan, J. T., Shrimpton, J. S., and Whybrew, A.: Two-Phase Flow Characterization by Automated Digital Image Analysis. Part 2: Application of
PDIA for Sizing Sprays, Part. Part. Syst. Char., 21, 15–23, https://doi.org/10.1002/ppsc.200400898, 2004. a
Klemm, O. and Lin, N.-H.: What Causes Observed Fog Trends: Air Quality or Climate Change?, Aerosol Air Qual. Res., 16, 1131–1142, https://doi.org/10.4209/aaqr.2015.05.0353, 2016. a
Kulkarni, R., Jenamani, R. K., Pithani, P., Konwar, M., Nigam, N., and Ghude, S. D.: Loss to Aviation Economy Due to Winter Fog in New Delhi during the Winter of 2011–2016, Atmosphere, 10, 198, https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos10040198, 2019. a
Liu, D., Yang, J., Niu, S., and Li, Z.: On the Evolution and Structure of a Radiation Fog Event in Nanjing, Adv. Atmos. Sci., 28, 223–237, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-010-0017-0, 2011. a
Liu, H.-Y., Schneider, P., Haugen, R., and Vogt, M.: Performance Assessment of a Low-Cost PM2.5 Sensor for a near Four-Month Period in Oslo, Norway, Atmosphere, 10, 41, https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos10020041, 2019. a
Martinet, P., Cimini, D., Burnet, F., Ménétrier, B., Michel, Y., and Unger, V.: Improvement of numerical weather prediction model analysis during fog conditions through the assimilation of ground-based microwave radiometer observations: a 1D-Var study, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 6593–6611, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-6593-2020, 2020. a
Martinet, P., Burnet, F., Bell, A., Kremer, A., Letillois, M., Löhnert, U., Antoine, S., Caumont, O., Cimini, D., Delanöe, J., Hervo, M., Huet, T., Georgis, J.-F., Orlandi, E., Price, J., Raynaud, L., Rottner, L., Seity, Y., and Unger, V.: Benefit of microwave radiometer and cloud radar observations for data assimilation and fog process studies during the SOFOG3D experiment, EMS Annual Meeting 2021, online, 6–10 September 2021, EMS2021-232, https://doi.org/10.5194/ems2021-232, 2021. a
Mazoyer, M., Burnet, F., Denjean, C., Roberts, G. C., Haeffelin, M., Dupont, J.-C., and Elias, T.: Experimental study of the aerosol impact on fog microphysics, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 4323–4344, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-4323-2019, 2019. a, b
Mazoyer, M., Burnet, F., and Denjean, C.: Experimental study on the evolution of droplet size distribution during the fog life cycle, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 11305–11321, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-11305-2022, 2022. a, b
Mohammadi, M., Nowak, J. L., Bertens, G., Moláček, J., Kumala, W., and Malinowski, S. P.: Cloud microphysical measurements at a mountain observatory: comparison between shadowgraph imaging and phase Doppler interferometry, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 965–985, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-965-2022, 2022. a, b
Okamoto, H., Sato, K., Nishizawa, T., Sugimoto, N., Makino, T., Jin, Y.,
Shimizu, A., Takano, T., and Fujikawa, M.: Development of a
multiple-field-of-view multiple-scattering polarization lidar: comparison
with cloud radar, Opt. Express, 24, 30053–30067,
https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.24.030053, 2016.
a
Posyniak, M., Markowicz, K., Czyzewska, D., Chilinski, M., Makuch, P.,
Zawadzka-Manko, O., Kucieba, S., Kulesza, K., Kachniarz, K., Mijal, K., and
Borek, K.: Experimental study of smog microphysical and optical vertical
structure in the Silesian Beskids, Poland, Atmos. Pollut. Res.,
12, 101171, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apr.2021.101171, 2021. a
Price, J. D., Lane, S., Boutle, I. A., Smith, D. K. E., Bergot, T., Lac, C.,
Duconge, L., McGregor, J., Kerr-Munslow, A., Pickering, M., and Clark, R.:
LANFEX: A Field and Modeling Study to Improve Our Understanding and
Forecasting of Radiation Fog, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 99, 2061–2077, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-16-0299.1, 2018. a
Pruppacher, H. and Klett, J.: Microstructure of Atmospheric Clouds and
Precipitation, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 10–73,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-306-48100-0_2, 2010. a
Tsai, I.-C., Hsieh, P.-R., Cheung, H. C., and Chung-Kuang Chou, C.: Aerosol
impacts on fog microphysics over the western side of Taiwan Strait in April
from 2015 to 2017, Atmos. Environ., 262, 118523,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118523, 2021. a, b
Vautard, R., Yiou, P., and Van Oldenborgh, G. J.: Decline of fog, mist and haze in Europe over the past 30years, Nat. Geosci., 2, 115–119,
https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo414, 2009. a, b
Vishwakarma, P., Delanoë, J., Le Gac, C., Bertrand, F., Dupont, J.-C., Haeffelin, M., Martinet, P., Burnet, F., Lac, C., Bell, A., Vignelles, D., Toledo, F., Jorquera, S., and Vinson, J.-P.: Fog Analysis during SOFOG3D Experiment, EGU General Assembly 2021, online, 19–30 April 2021, EGU21-9941, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu21-9941, 2021. a
Wang, Q., Yamaguchi, R. T., Kalogiros, J. A., Daniels, Z., Alappattu, D. P., Jonsson, H., Alvarenga, O., Olson, A., Wauer, B. J., Ortiz-Suslow, D. G., and
Fernando, H. J.: Microphysics and Optical Attenuation in Fog: Observations
from Two Coastal Sites, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 181, 267–292,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-021-00675-5, 2021. a
Wang, Y., Li, J., Jing, H., Zhang, Q., Jiang, J., and Biswas, P.: Laboratory Evaluation and Calibration of Three Low-Cost Particle Sensors for Particulate
Matter Measurement, Aerosol Sci. Tech., 49, 1063–1077,
https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2015.1100710, 2015. a
Wærsted, E. G., Haeffelin, M., Dupont, J.-C., Delanoë, J., and Dubuisson, P.: Radiation in fog: quantification of the impact on fog liquid water based on ground-based remote sensing, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 10811–10835, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-10811-2017, 2017. a
Weston, M., Francis, D., Nelli, N., Fonseca, R., Temimi, M., and Addad, Y.: The First Characterization of Fog Microphysics in the United Arab Emirates, an Arid Region on the Arabian Peninsula, Earth Space Sci., 9, e2021EA002032, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021EA002032, 2022. a
Xu, W., Yang, H., Sun, D., Qi, X., and Xian, J.: Lidar system with a fast
scanning speed for sea fog detection, Opt. Express, 30, 27462–27471,
https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.464190, 2022. a
Short summary
In this paper we evaluate the low-cost Alphasense OPC-N3 optical particle counter for measurements of fog microphysics. We compare OPC-N3 with the Oxford Lasers VisiSize D30. This work is significant because OPC-N3 can be used with drones for vertical profiles in fog.
In this paper we evaluate the low-cost Alphasense OPC-N3 optical particle counter for...